Why would President Obama order surveillance of the Trump campaign?

Please explain why the revelations were not made during the campaign? As I have pointed out, even in the allegations are not true, the controversy
could have changed the outcome of the election.

Why? Flynn wasn't running for anything? How would leaks about Flynn change the election? It was leaked after Trump put him in the administration to
damage Trump.

ETA: you kind of prove the point of there is no evidence about Trump. If there were unmasking on him for so long and didn't leak anything, its because
they didn't find anything. Except for against Flynn.

It wasn't just Flynn. Manafort was dropped from the campaign like a hot potato when his background came to light. At that point, of course, the Trump
campaign was so disorganized that even if the Clinton campaign had more dirt it arrogantly believed it wouldn't be necessary to use it.

You ask why Obama would spy on Trump's campaign? Perhaps to dig up dirt on the candidate. All of the survelliance and spying that they did on Trump
and they couldn't find anything to use against him.
The reports were very detailed and had nothing to do with Russia.

"This is information about their everyday lives," Rep. Peter King of New York, a member of the House Intelligence committee said. "Sort of
like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and
then you try to piece it together later on.”

I dont see any reason why Rice would need to share these with other intelligence agencies since the information seems to be mostly about the Trump's
families everyday activities and nothing nefarious. source

Wikileaks didn't need to release anything about Trump because there were plenty of outlets in the MSM that were doing that 24/7, hence the
reason why anything and everything that could have been used to tarnish Trump's character was used whether it was true or not.

If you have a chance, would you mind providing some evidence proving that the MSM were just lying 24/7? I have known who Trump is since forever, just
like every American who pays any attention to MSM at all. Trump has always been a "celebrity." His 'business accumen' is riddled with poor
discipline, stiffing workers, offending women, bankruptcies, civil law suits for racketeering with his fraudulent Trump University, etc.

The problem, I think, was the "FAKE NEWS!" bs that gave his naive and disgruntled base the freedom to run. I know this is a conspiracy website that
is generally suspicious of both government AND mainstream information, but that does not mean that everything on CNN is a lie.

On the contrary, the internet has given voice to everyone, and sadly LOTS AND LOTS of those "alternative" voices are simply insane. If one
deliberately chooses to consult angry, vindictive, manipulative charlatans (Bannon) rather than serious journalists, one will wind up with a warped
perspective. For conspiracy theorists, Alex Jones is a messiah. To the rest of us, he's a deranged troll.

Russia's RT and Sputnik are, on the other hand, state-run propaganda. We have their equivalent in Fox News, and Trump's behavior on Twitter is the
evidence that he is trying to force EVERYONE to believe Fox News. It's ridiculous.

When Fox News debuted it was crafted from scratch to be a partisan outlet for right-wing propaganda and a platform for advancing a conservative
agenda. Its Internet community web site, Fox Nation, serves as the online gathering place for Fox viewers to absorb and spread the aggregated
disinformation and conspiracy theories hatched by Fox News.

Two years ago the first volume of Fox Nation vs. Reality was published revealing an Internet operation that was dedicated to fiercely partisan,
right-wing distortions of the truth. Its mission was, and remains, to construct a safe haven for the broader Fox News community to reinforce their
preferred fantasies and unfounded preconceptions. Since then Fox Nation has evolved into an even more sheltered environment that has taken on many
characteristics of culthood.

Fox Nation vs. Reality Volume II: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance, provides an eye-opening look into the lengths that committed propagandists will go
in order to fabricate an alternative political reality. And remember, Fox Nation is not some remote outpost on the Internet Superhighway. It is an
integral part of Fox News whose executives are wholly responsible for the stain it produces on journalism.

You ask why Obama would spy on Trump's campaign? Perhaps to dig up dirt on the candidate. All of the survelliance and spying that they did on
Trump and they couldn't find anything to use against him.

I find that very difficult to believe. Remember, there was an unbelievable amount of dirt that was public knowledge. An active fraud case, allegations
of using illegal immigrants, sexual harassment, dealings with gangsters, etc, etc, etc.

The reports were very detailed and had nothing to do with Russia.

According to a Republican Congressman who had seen the information provided to him by the Trump White House. We have no idea of what was kept under
wraps.

ETA:

I dont see any reason why Rice would need to share these with other intelligence agencies since the information seems to be mostly about the
Trump's families everyday activities and nothing nefarious.

Actually, the intelligence agencies were providing this information to Rice.

The timeline is also unclear. When was the initial surveillance done? Was it done before Trump's candidacy, in which case, did Trump know he was
recruiting possible foreign agents?

There's not much doubt that Manafort at least, has been under surveillance going back for along time, maybe 2012 even, all according to his dealings
in Russia and Ukraine. No surprise then that anyone in the Trump campaign would, or could be caught up in that net. My guess is that those two or more
phone calls made by Trump's camp to either Trump or who knows, Russia even, from the RNC session early July last year, where the atitude to Russia was
softened, would play some role in further more encompassing surveillance besides Manafort, if they have been picked up by intel, which is more than
likely. My guess there is that most of the media are aware of the phone calls, CNN for sure... if not what they contained, and are probably busting
themselves trying to find out.

One other thing, Manafort did drop out from the campaign, but Trump was or still is using him for advice, one outlet; www.thedailybeast.com...

Trump's ties to Manfort go back a long way, this Guardian article of April 2016 shows even then serious concerns about both Manafort and Trump in
party circles, as well as background movers and shakers, and also the McCain campaign. www.theguardian.com...

You ask why Obama would spy on Trump's campaign? Perhaps to dig up dirt on the candidate. All of the survelliance and spying that they did on Trump
and they couldn't find anything to use against him.
The reports were very detailed and had nothing to do with Russia.

Ironically, remember the DNC themselves thought it would be a great thing if Trump happens to be the GOP candidate.

How is a Russian citizen using his instagram account to convey his political leanings considered election interference? For god's sake, CNN uses their
twitter account to convey their political leanings but no one wants to blame them for election interference.

In response to your second link:

Without going into all the ifs and mays in the article, how is Putin expressing his interest in a candidate that he favors considered
election interference? China, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar expressed interest in then candidate Hillary Clinton, so much interest that they donated tens of
millions of dollars to her foundation.

In response to your third link:

This thread isn't even about elections or interference, it's just your wild conspiracy theory of how you think Putin is trying to conquer Europe. I'll
let it speak for itself.

Have you ever relied on RT, globalresearch.ca, or zerohedge.com? Apparently not. How about Alt-right web pages and blogs? No? That's the only
way you can not have seen Russia's interference.

I'm sorry, what interference? I'm still waiting for evidence of interference.

How is a Russian citizen using his instagram account to convey his political leanings considered election interference? For god's sake, CNN uses their
twitter account to convey their political leanings but no one wants to blame them for election interference.

So you are saying that CNN did not try to influence the election? I'm afraid Donald Trump would disagree with you there.

In response to your second link:

Without going into all the ifs and mays in the article, how is Putin expressing his interest in a candidate that he favors considered election
interference? China, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar expressed interest in then candidate Hillary Clinton, so much interest that they donated tens of millions
of dollars to her foundation.

So you think it is entirely a coincidence that Russia ponied up millions to start a French language propaganda outlet just in time for the French
primaries?

In response to your third link:

This thread isn't even about elections or interference, it's just your wild conspiracy theory of how you think Putin is trying to conquer Europe. I'll
let it speak for itself.

No. Putin is simply trying to Make Russia Great Again. That is not a conspiracy theory, that is his promise to the Russian people. This thread does
speak for itself; it details how he plans to do it:

If you have a chance, would you mind providing some evidence proving that the MSM were just lying 24/7?

The allegation made about Trump insulting a disabled reporter is a debunked lie.

The 11 women that accused Trump of sexual assault all lied and all dropped their cases when Trump won.

You don't hear much about them now, do you?

The story about Trump removing the bust of MLK was a lie.

The dossier was proven to be a complete fabrication.

The list goes on.

Russia's RT and Sputnik are, on the other hand, state-run propaganda.

Can't speak about Sputnik but how is RT state-run propaganda? They aren't state-run, they received their initial funding to launch the network from
the state many years ago but that hardly qualifies them as a propaganda mouth piece for the state.

FOX News still has several anchors that are consistently critical of Trump in ways that imply a partisan bias, such as Shepard Smith, Chris Wallace,
Geraldo Rivera, Bob Beckel, Juan Williams.

Show me the regular pundits on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, that are consistently pro Trump.

So you are saying that CNN did not try to influence the election? I'm afraid Donald Trump would disagree with you there.

I'm saying that Russia influenced the election no more than CNN influenced the election.

You still didn't answer my question so I'll repeat it to you: How is a Russian citizen using his instagram account to convey his political leanings
considered election interference?

So you think it is entirely a coincidence that Russia ponied up millions to start a French language propaganda outlet just in time for the
French primaries?

Not at all, there's a high demand in France for the information and editorial content on RT. Remember that RT is not owned by the state. Again you've
attempted to answer my question with another question.

So you have never seen a post here that made you suspect the member was a Russian troll? I certainly have.

Anybody from anywhere in the world can make an account and post content here. That does not qualify it to be election interference by any means.

I'm sure there were some Russian trolls that were doing trollish things throughout the election, so were people from Clinton's side, and people on the
Alt-Right, it's called campaigning.

Not only that, just because some trolls were Russian doesn't mean that they were paid by Putin to post their political leanings on the internet, that
was for HRC and the CTR crew.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.